Wikileaks has been and still is seen and viewed by millions
upon millions as a ushering in a new age in transparacy,
and against the disinformation, lies, propaganda put forth
by the government through the corporate media.
They state that Wikileaks is intended to be 'an uncensorable
version of Wikipedia' putting 'untraceable document leaking
and anaylsis' in to the public domain.
They are principally interested in the oppressive regimes in Asia,
the former Soviet bloc, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East.'1
This is also the area of concern and focus of US foreign policy.
And, that is undeniable. So, a new allegedly' anti establishment website
surfaces and 'allegedly' offers the truth in the same areas that the US
war party also has an interest, and also a need for effective disinformation
and propaganda.
"Our primary targets are those highly oppressive regimes in China,
Russia and Central Eurasia,' (quoted in WikiLeaks and Julian Paul
Assange : The New Yorker, June 7, 2010, emphasis added).'2
Whatever one may say about Wikileaks their area of interests is the same as
those running the wars from Washington...to a tee!!
Wikileaks gets about 50% of it's funds from small donations from active
supporters. But, it also receives millions from some who can step forward
with millions. Yet, Assange will not discuss those.
But, perhaps the biggest red flag should be that Wikileaks turns over all
of it's material to the most establishment of establishment of newpapers:
The New York Times, for one.
The New York Times has been the main media organ for putting out the lies,
disinformation and propaganda for American governments since it's inception.
It's role was crucial in promoting all the Lies used in the run up to the Iraq
war in 2003. The flip side of the coin is that it keeps out the truth.
The Times appointed David E. Sanger to sift through the documents and
filter out what should be released. As pointed out by Michel Chossudovsky,
Sanger sits on 'the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Aspen Institute's Strategy Group' with 'Madeleine K. Albright, Condoleeza Rice, former Defense Secretary William Perry, former CIA head John Deutch, the president of the World Bank, Robert. B. Zoellick and Philip Zelikow, former executive director of the 9/11 Commission.'3
So, if assange really is seeking transparency as he claims, then why give this job
to people who have dedicated their lives to hiding, or lying about the truth?
Does not that sound strange to those who unquestionably support Assange, and Wikileaks?
The CIA has always had a very close working relationship with the likes of the
New York Times and almost every newspaper of consequence in America and the West.
And then there are these questions for unquestioning supporters of of Assange:
1. He says that the 9/11 Truth movement is a false conspiracy at a time
when most Americans recognize the truth....that 9/11 was an attack from within.
Who's interest does he serve when he says these things?
Assange assesment of Benjamin Netanyahu is that he is a "sophisticated politician". To me he is a murderer.How can Assange praise such a man?
Who's interst does this serve?
It is one of the greatest cons
1. Who is Behind Wikileaks? by Michel Chossudovsky Global Research,
December 13, 2010 http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22389
2. ibid.
3. ibid.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment